11-24-1997
~
.....,
CITY OF EDGEWATER
Land Development and Regulatory Agency
Regular Meeting
Monday, November 24, 1997
6:30 p.m.
Chairman Masso called to order the regular meeting of the Land Development and Regulatory
Agency at 6:30 p.m., November 24, 1997 in the ShufHe Board Room, across from the
Edgewater Community Center.
ROLL CALL
Members present were Mr. Zeese, Mr. Garthwaite, Ms. Agrusa (arrived at 6:32), Mr.
Hildenbrand and Chairman Masso. Also in attendance were Mark P. Karet, Director of
Community Development, Attorney Mary Hansen, Joe Martin, PE, and Sondra M. Pengov,
Board Coordinator.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A motion was made by Mr. Garthwaite to approve the minutes of July 30, 1997 and seconded by
Mr. Zeese. Motion CARRIED 4-0. Ms. Agrusa did not vote as she hadn't arrived as yet.
OLD BUSINESS
None at this time.
NEW BUSINESS
Public Hearing - AN-9702 - Mary D. Hansen. PA. Authorized Agent for Edentown
Company N.V. is Requesting an Annexation Approval for 84 +Acres located on S.R.
442
Chairman Masso inquired of the Board members whether anyone had visited the site or spoke to
anyone regarding the annexation. Mr. Zeese said he had looked at the site. The other members
responded they hadn't.
Land Development and Regulatory Agency
Regular Meeting
November 24, 1997
1
....
....,
Chairman Masso then opened the Public Hearing and asked Mr. Karet for staff's comments.
Mr. Karet first stated the application indicated 84.:t. acres comprised the requested annexation,
but the survey showed slightly less than 90 acres. Mr. Karet said the subject property is located on
the north side of S.R. 442, east of the City's water plant, contiguous to property on the south
side of S.R. 442. The property contains a single-family residence and an orange grove.
Mr. Karet said the applicant wishes to annex for two reasons; first, the owners have determined
the best uses of the property in the future will be nonagricultural activities; secondly, the owners
wish to sell their property and believe it may be more marketable inside the City than outside.
Mr. Karet referred to the draft annexation agreement, saying it was similar to the others presented
in the past. He said this draft agreement commits the City to process a comprehensive plan
amendment that will designate the property for urban type uses. Mr. Karet said it has been a goal
of the City to annex properties out to and surrounding the I-95/S.R. 442 Interchange. He
concluded saying the Department of Community Development supports the applicant's request
for annexation.
Chairman Masso asked the Board if they had any questions. Mr. Garthwaite asked Mr. Karet
what control does the City have? Mr. Karet responded that a range of uses are possible with no
guarantee to the applicant, as this will be processed through the State (Department of
Community Affairs).
Ms. Hansen. Attorney- 1620 Clyde Morris Boulevard, responded the agreement does not
establish a comprehensive plan land use or density. She said this is a contemplation between the
parties and will remain for the next two years under the County's agricultural zoning designation.
Ms. Hansen stated the normal procedures for rezoning will be followed when the time comes.
Mr. Zeese asked who would be responsible for the infrastructure if the property is sold as
residential. Mr. Karet replied, ultimately the developer would be responsible. Ms. Hansen stated,
for the record, there are several mechanisms available to the City; first, Chapter 163 requires at
the time of the development sufficient infrastructure must be in place; second, a series of impact
fees, both in the County and City are required to be paid by the developer; and third, land to be
set aside or actual site plan approvals wherein the developer will undertake at its own cost. Ms.
Hansen said planned unit development, in her opinion, is very desirable for this site. Ms. Hansen
concluded saying she inquired with the Interim City Attorney and V olusia County as to whether
they had any problem with the proposed annexation of which both said they had no objections.
There being no additional comments Chairman Masso closed the public hearing.
Land Development and Regulatory Agency
Regular Meeting
November 24, 1997
2
'-'
""""
As the Board had no further comments, Chairman Masso asked for a motion. Mr. Garthwaite
moved to approve the annexation and send recommendation to the City Council, seconded by
Ms. Agrusa. Motion CARRIED 5-0.
Public Hearing - AP-9702 - Toe D. Martin. PE, Authorized Agent for Ron. Carwile of
1701 South Ridgewood Avenue is Requesting an Appeal of the Decision of the Director
of Community Development Regarding Section 700.0Hd)(2) of the Zoning Ordinance.
Chairman Masso asked whether any members of the Board had visited the site or spoken with
anyone regarding the request. Mr. Zeese said he visited the site. All the other Board members
replied no. Chairman Masso then opened the public hearing. Chairman Masso asked Mr. Martin
to present his case first.
Mr. Martin said he has never disputed the language of the Zoning Ordinance, Section
700.01(d)(2)- Required Off-street Parking. However, he said he is appealing what appears to be
an inconsistency with the rule. Mr. Martin said the property owner found other businesses in
Edgewater, similar in nature to his without paved parking. Mr. Martin explained the applicant
had a pre-application conference and submitted a site plan showing shell parking. He said the
City Engineer stated the parking had to have a permanently hard surface. For the record, Mr.
Martin passed out Exhibits "A through F" of various businesses without paved parking. Mr.
Garthwaite said the Board is not concerned with other businesses, just the Carwile property. Mr.
Karet agreed with Mr. Garthwaite, but said he would like to respond so the Board knows staff is
applying the code properly. Mr. Karet responded to Mr. Martin's Exhibit photos, explaining the
required parking for each business so the Board would understand the rationality behind staff's
decisions. Mr. Karet responded the differences between occupational licenses and site plan
approval. Mr. Karet said he didn't believe a lot of this information to be relevant to the decision
the LDRA had to make.
Mr. Karet reviewed the background of the request. He said after initial communication with the
property owners, Mr. Martin requested a preapplication conference. Mr. Karet said at this
meeting Mr. Martin was informed if new parking was going to be created, it would have to meet
the requirements of the code. Mr. Martin did not question the meaning of the language
pertaining to parking requirements. Mr. Karet said Mr. Martin submitted a proposed site plan in
September and it contained new parking spaces which were not designed to meet the code
requirements as discussed in the preapplication meeting. Mr. Karet stated at the staff technical
review committee meeting in October, Mr. Martin was told verbally and in writing that the new
parking spaces shown did not meet code requirements. He said Mr. Martin resubmitted the site
plan, but did not comply with the requirements of the code and written comments from staff.
Mr. Karet said at this time Mr. Martin submitted a letter that stated the applicant's intention to
Land Development and Regulatory Agency
Regular Meeting
November 24, 1997
3
'W'
..""
appeal staff's interpretation of the code. Mr. Karet concluded saying the Department of
Community Development requests the Land Development and Regulatory Agency uphold staff's
interpretation of Section 700.01(d)(2) of the Zoning Ordinance.
Both Ms. Agrusa and Mr. Zeese had the same reservations regarding the consistency of
requirements. Ms. Agrusa understood that the code needs to be followed, however, she feels that
when properties change ownership they should be brought up to code.
Mr. Martin submitted for the record, the occupational licenses for the previous use of the subject
property. The occupational licenses indicated that both were for a commercial use. Mr. Karet
responded that has been a residential use for a number of years. However, he said the physical
improvements associated with the past use have been removed from the property and it was vacant
land.
There being no further discussion Chairman Masso closed the public hearing.
A recess was called for at 8:30 p.m. Chairman Masso resumed the meeting at 8:35 p.m.
Mr. Garthwaite then moved to accept Mr. Karet's recommendation, this request should meet the
site plan requirements including paving.
Mr. Karet explained to the Board that the site plan, as presented by the applicant, does not meet
the requirements of the code section, that is why staff turned it down. Mr. Karet said the decision
before the Board should focus on what Section 700.01(d)(2) requires and what the applicant
submitted. If the applicant's submittal does not comply with the code, staff's position should be
upheld.
Mr. Garthwaite then withdrew is motion.
Mr. Garthwaite restated his motion to say he supports staff's position, seconded by Mr. Zeese.
Motion CARRIED 5-0
Chairman Masso told Mr. Martin he may appeal to the Council within 30 days.
Membership Applications
Discussion on Review of Applicants
The Board reviewed membership applications for the two vacant positions on the LDRA board.
After discussion between the Board members as how to best rate qualified applicants, it was
Land Development and Regulatory Agency
Regular Meeting
November 24, 1997
4
.
......
.....,
decided that each member would individually rate the applications. The four applicants with the
majority of votes were selected for recommendation to the City Council.
The four applicants in order are as follows: Edwin 1. Vopelak, Joanne M. Heeb, Thomas P.
Calabrese, Russell 1. Mullen, Jr.
A motion was made by Mr. Garthwaite to recommend the four applicants to the City Council to
choose two of the applicants to fill the vacancies of the LDRA, seconded by Mr. Hildenbrand.
The motion CARRIED 5-0.
DISCUSSION ITEMS
Consider Date Change for December Meeting Due to Holiday
The Board agreed to change the December meeting to Tuesday, January 6, 1998.
A. Community Director's Report
Mr. Karet had left the meeting.
B. Chairman's Report
Chairman Masso had nothing to report.
C. Agency Member's Report
The Board had nothing to report.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no additional business to come before the Board, a motion was made and approved
to adjoum. The meeting adjourned at 9:30 p.m.
Minutes respectfully submitted by:
Sondra M. Pengov, Board Coordinator
Land Development and Regulatory Agency
:smp
c: \LD RA \rninutes\1l/24/97
Land Development and Regulatory Agency
Regular Meeting
November 24, 1997
5